MSNBC Benches Contributor Who Smeared Bernie Sanders Staffers

[demmiblue]

Following MSNBC contributor Dr. Jason Johnson’s inflammatory remarks about supporters and campaign staffers of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the academic has been temporarily benched by the network, sources confirmed to The Daily Beast.

In recent months, Johnson—a regular fixture of the network’s Democratic primary analysis—has drawn considerable heat for his relentlessly anti-Sanders commentary on MSNBC, which has also come under fire from the left for its skeptical and largely negative coverage of the democratic-socialist senator.

During an interview last week on SiriusXM’s The Karen Hunter Show, Johnson claimed “racist white liberals” support Sanders and that the senator has done “nothing for intersectionality.”

The MSNBC contributor then took aim at the women of color who work for Sanders. “I don’t care how many people from the island of misfit black girls you throw out there to defend you,” Johnson exclaimed.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/msnbc-benches-contributor-jason-johnson-who-said-bernie-sanders-staffers-are-island-of-misfit-black-girls?via=twitter_page

[Wellstone ruled]

1. Oh that is way funny.

So Andy Lacky once again is controlling the Narrative.

[melman]

2. Good news

I think that, along with the Matthews apology, this shows MSNBC senses the times are a changin'.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

28. YES INDEED... BOUT TIME!! GOOD FOR MSNBC!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

3. Good.

[HarlanPepper]

5. Yes.dissent must be silenced.

[HarlanPepper]

7. Why stop there.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. Seriously!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[demmiblue]

9. Here is the video, FWIW:

Link to tweet

The hosts weren't having any of that #MisfitBlackGirls foolishness.

[JudyM]

12. That is beyond the pale on several levels. Ought to be fired for that.

[dsc]

10. So let me get this straight

Joy Reid can call all gay males child molesters, lie to our faces about doing so, and she is golden. But Johnson insults sanders supporters and he has to go

[Blue_Tires]

11. Getting a little too close to the truth, I see...

[Fiendish Thingy]

13. Wish they'd bench Tweety and Carville and Chuck Todd nt

[Nanjeanne]

14. I'm with you 100%

I'm still shocked they dug Carville up from some crypt for this. It's been years since we have had to listen to his schtick.

[RGTIndy]

15. Someone told Carville that Ross Perot was dead

and his winning election strategy suddenly evaporated.

[W_HAMILTON]

17. That's a false claim that has been debunked before.

(Regarding your assertion that Clinton only won because Perot played spoiler.)

[RGTIndy]

18. Math has been debunked?

No kidding?

[W_HAMILTON]

19. I'm sorry that you have a very superficial understanding of what happened.

Here, I will help educate you -- here is a start:

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ross-perot-myth-reborn-amid-rumors-third-party-trump-candidacy

Most importantly from that article:

…

But in the exit poll conducted on Election Day, just 38% of Perot’s backers said Bush was their second choice. Thirty-eight percent also said Clinton was. “The impact of Mr. Perot’s supporters on the campaign’s outcome,” wrote The New York Times, “appears to have been minimal.” The Washington Post’s conclusion: “Ross Perot’s presence on the 1992 presidential ballot did not change the outcome of the election.”

Perot pulled support from both Democrats and Republicans, and to assume that he "spoiled" the election for Bush is assuming that all or most of his supporters would have voted for Bush if Perot were not in the race, which is not the case.

[RGTIndy]

20. A national exit poll is quite meaningless, since there isn't a national election

Unless of course you are going to look at the election, as you say, “superficially,” as the Washington Post did here.
One would at least need to do a state by state analysis, and when that is done it is anything but clear. Here is a more nuanced analysis, of you’re interested:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/10/we_dont_know_whether_perot_cost_bush_in_1992_140743.html

[W_HAMILTON]

21. Even your own article rebuts your original point.

Whether Perot didn't cost Bush the election (my article) or "we don't know whether Perot cost Bush the election (your article), neither dare to claim that Perot was the reason that Clinton won (your original point). You should stop assuredly making such claims when even the evidence you provide doesn't back you up.

[RGTIndy]

32. Clinton only received more than 50% of the vote in ONE state

Arkansas. In 2008 Barack Obama got more than 50% of the vote in 26 states. I merely pointed you to a quick article that explained why the “exit poll” argument was simplistic and flawed. The is plenty of more detailed analysis out there. But sure, James Carville was a genius and Bill Clinton ran a brilliant campaign. Whatever gets you through the night.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

30. THIS x 1,000!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[NurseJackie]

16. LOL! I love the sense of humor.

[OliverQ]

22. Good. Too bad they didn't get rid of Matthews and Todd too.

[NurseJackie]

23. Aw.

[OliverQ]

24. What's that supposed to mean?

[NurseJackie]

25. Hmmm. Interesting.

[OliverQ]

26. That doesn't answer my question.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. Long overdue!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[oasis]

27. Steve Schmidt and Jason are two of my favorite Trump bashers

on MSNBC. I'll miss him.